Bringing the invisible into perspective

Transcription

1 Bringing the invisible into perspective Reference document for using the 5Cs framework to plan, monitor and evaluate capacity and results of capacity development processes Caution! Living document Many organisations are currently experimenting with the 5 capabilities framework as a basis for their approach to capacity. As a result, its translation into a practical methodology is still emerging, and the same applies to this reference document. The authors therefore invite practitioners to share their experiences and own materials through which the authors would use to make periodical updates. They will be available for download from December 2011 Published by ECDPM Maastricht, the Netherlands

2 About this document Reader s guide: This reference document describes a comprehensive approach for planning, monitoring and evaluation of capacity and the results of capacity development processes. This capacity framework used centres around 5 capabilities ( 5Cs ) that together contribute to an organisation s ability to create social value. The document has been written for development practitioners in Southern organisations and planning, monitoring and evaluation professionals with whom they collaborate. As the title implies, it is not itself a handbook or a tool. Rather, the text is intended to explain a 5Cs perspective that can be practically translated and applied in context and organisation-specific ways. It contains practical suggestions and concrete experience to help the reader in adapting the 5Cs to a most appropriate use in their own context and for their own purposes. Throughout this reference document, three kinds of boxes are being used to support the main text. These boxes are indicated by one of the three symbols shown below, and contain 1) useful tips & tricks, 2) examples from the field, and 3) references to relevant background information. These boxes include tips and practical suggestions concerning the use of the 5 Capabilities (5Cs) framework to monitor or evaluate (support to) capacity development; These boxes summarise key studies that illustrate or further clarify the text of this reference document and provide suggestions for further reading; These boxes describe concrete past experiences in the use of the 5Cs framework in different circumstances. Authors of this reference document: This document has been written by Niels Keijzer, Eunike Spierings, Geert Phlix and Alan Fowler Acknowledgements and disclaimer The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the Policy and Operations Evaluation Department (IOB) of the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the production of this document. The authors would like to thank Paul Engel, Jan Brouwers, Bert Lof, Wouter Rijneveld, Rafaëla Feddes and Piet de Lange for specific contributions or comments on the draft version of this document. The views expressed in this document are those of the authors only, and should not be attributed to any other person or institution. 2

3 Table of contents About this document... 2 List of acronyms Introduction Purpose of this reference note Background to the reference note Relevance of capacity development and some theoretical background Structure of the note Introducing the 5Cs framework Origin and purpose of the 5Cs framework Systems perspective and multi-stakeholder approach Capacity and the five core capabilities Capacity as generating social value How to use the 5Cs framework: preconditions The central role of the Southern organisation Key challenges, or how not to use the 5Cs framework Calibrate the capacity assessment framework Attention to both hard and soft sides of capacity: power and gender Using the 5Cs framework with collaborative associations Strategic planning of capacity development The use of the 5Cs framework in the planning of capacity development programmes Baselines to plan capacity development processes Tracking and discussing changes in capacity Monitoring capacity development Using the 5Cs framework in capacity development monitoring Evaluation of capacity development Evaluating capacity development Linking capacity changes and outcomes Methodologies and limitations Applying the 5Cs framework in types of evaluations, including with collaborative associations The Role of the donor in using the 5Cs framework The role of the donor in planning capacity development Monitoring support to capacity development with the 5Cs framework Evaluating support to capacity development with the 5Cs framework Bibliography Annex Indicator examples

5 1. Introduction 1.1. Purpose of this reference note This reference document describes a framework for planning, monitoring and evaluation of capacity and the results of capacity development processes. It aims to guide organisations in developing countries that operate individually or as collaborative associations 1 on how to use a framework based on 5 capabilities ( 5Cs ). The content comes from reflection, analysis and key lessons learned from recent evaluations of support to capacity development. It gives examples and tools. It also provides suggestions on how the 5Cs framework can be adapted and used in planning, monitoring and evaluation processes. (See about this document on page 2 for clarification of symbols used). Finally it proposes changes to the practical evaluation of capacities and interventions aiming to support their further development. The 5Cs framework can be applied to any type of organisation anywhere in the world. However, this reference note is tailored to support the use of the 5Cs framework by Southern organisations, particularly those that have to deal with the international aid system. Therefore, the targeted audiences of the reference document are practitioners in Southern development organisations and the professionals with whom they collaborate. For readability purposes, we will use the term organisation to refer to all the kinds of Southern organisations applying the 5Cs framework, including the wider systems of which they are part. 2 This publication covers the use of the 5Cs framework for planning, monitoring and evaluation (PM&E). But please remember that the use of this framework can only complement and in no case replace existing approaches to PM&E. Monitoring and evaluation practices generally improve gradually and inclusively, and are shaped by management decisions about what information is needed for what purposes. A common consideration is the information desires of external partners. Chapter 7 therefore looks specifically at the potential role of international development donors in facilitating the use of the 5Cs framework by organisations in the South. This publication is geared towards helping people who do development work improve their practices in PM&E and their understanding of how capacity develops. To keep the explanation straightforward, the document does not deal extensively with conceptual and policy discussions on capacity development. Instead it will draw from key references while focusing mostly on sharing specific tips, ways of applying the framework, examples and methodological suggestions. Finally, although this document specifically aims to support Southern organisations in using the 5Cs, the practical ideas and stories presented in this document are predominantly derived from experiences and processes led by development (funding) partners based in the Netherlands (see section 1.2 for further information). The role of 1 For sake of convenience, organisations in developing countries and associations thereof are henceforth referred to as Southern organisations. 2 To apply the 5Cs framework, an analysis needs to be made of the system in which the organisation operates (see chapter 2). 5

6 donors in using the 5Cs is specifically covered in chapter 7. Readers are encouraged to share their experiences in using the 5Cs and provide comments that can help to periodically update and gradually improve the usefulness of this document Background to the reference note In 2009, the Policy and Operations Evaluation Department (IOB) of the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs launched a major learning-oriented evaluation of Dutch support for capacity development in 17 countries. An objective was to respond to the demand of the Ministry, Dutch NGOs and their partners in developing countries for knowledge and insight that could contribute to capacity development policy. One - but certainly not the only - key element in the methodology used for this evaluation was to rely on the results of a study on capacity described below. The framework divides the broad concept of capacity into five so-called core capabilities. These five capabilities are possessed by every organisation and social system. None of them can by itself create capacity. They are strongly interrelated. They can provide a context-specific basis for assessing a situation at a particular moment, after which the capacity of the system can be monitored and tracked over time in order to judge how it has developed. Before, during and after the IOB s evaluation, a wide group of capacity development and evaluation practitioners have gained experience in applying the 5Cs framework. The IOB s synthesis report of the evaluation highlights that the application of the 5Cs framework has stringent criteria in terms of first measuring how an organisation s capacity had developed endogenously, i.e. seen from the perspective of the organisation in its context. From this starting point the task over time is to systematically track the extent to which external support to the organisation/system is making a difference to any of the core capabilities. This approach is empirically demanding and often costly. The evaluation also confirmed that that the 5Cs framework cannot be used as a universal checklist or questionnaire. To be relevant end reliable, the 5Cs must be adapted to the circumstances in which it is used. The evaluation concluded that, when Southern organisations and the Dutch donors shared an interest in learning about capacity development, the 5Cs framework can provide: A grounded basis for discussion; A way of identifying system content and relationships; and A structured and scalable approach to monitoring and evaluation capacity change, particularly suited to complex, multi-stakeholder arrangements. This reference document starts from the findings of the IOB s synthesis report and suggests how some key recommendations of the evaluation can be translated into practice. 3 3 The IOB synthesis report (IOB 2011) concludes the 5Cs framework requires improvements to make it suitable for broader application. These improvements have still to be developed. Especially in situations that allow for less control than in the IOB evaluation, the framework needs to be developed using a more robust methodology, and the five core capabilities need to be described in less academic and abstract terms. 6

7 1.3. Relevance of capacity development and some theoretical background One defining characteristic of development cooperation is the lack of common agreement on many terms which form the basis of its core business. Examples are poverty, growth and indeed development. Capacity development is no exception. A medium-sized library can be filled with studies looking into the concept of capacity and how it develops over time (see the bibliography for a modest selection). Given the significant investment made in capacity development, the lack of an agreed concept and adequate policy discussion is worrying. Nevertheless, available theoretical and empirical studies - as well as policy statements - indicate a growing consensus on a few basic assumptions. Box 1 presents some commonalities found by Fowler and Ubels (2010) in the past work of the Community Resource Development Association (CDRA) and the European Centre for Development Policy Management. Box 1: Points of convergence in studies on capacity development (Fowler and Ubels 2010) Capacity is a multi-faceted phenomenon. It is based on different competencies or capabilities that combine and interact to shape the overall capacity of a purposeful human system. Ways in which elements are present and combine can vary enormously within and between types of organisation. Generalisations should be made only with great care, placing more trust in those that derive from experience with the type of entity or entities one is working with. Single organisation, a group of organisations, social institutions or a sector should be seen as living and dynamic systems. This perspective stresses the need to understand not only concrete observable features of organisations, but also the more intangible dimensions and connections. Working on capacity development requires making both visible. The uncertain, emergent nature of capacity also implies that its development is unlikely to be a linear, well-planned, predictable process. Consequently, active observation of changes and responsiveness are important. A practitioner needs to be conscious about the framework and specific dimensions that one uses and the assumptions one relies on. Such self-understanding positions the practitioner in relation to the frames used by others, which may be very different. The lens employed to see and read an organisation in its history and context makes a big difference: in diagnosis, in negotiation and selection of remedies, in accountability for and commitment to change, and so on. Identifying adequate action requires a robust and inclusive understanding of a situation. Given that capacity is a highly relational concept, a sub-theme is that power matters. Practitioners need to be aware of what types of power are in play, where they are located and how they are applied. In the past few decades, capacity development is gaining greater prominence in international discussions on the performance and future of development cooperation. In September 2008, the Accra Agenda for Action was adopted in which ministers from developed and donor countries acknowledged that capacity was essential for development: Without robust capacity strong institutions, systems, and local expertise developing countries cannot fully own and manage their development processes. 7

8 Approximately a quarter of all donor aid (more than US$15 billion a year) is spent on technical cooperation, the bulk of which is ostensibly aimed at capacity development. Capacity development can be defined in different ways. One frequently referred to set of definitions is used by the OECD/DAC (2006), which distinguishes between capacity, capacity development and support provided to capacity development: Capacity is the ability of people, organisations and society as a whole to manage their affairs successfully. Capacity development is understood as the process whereby people, organisations and society as a whole unleash, strengthen, create, adapt and maintain capacity over time. Promotion of capacity development refers to what outside partners domestic or foreign can do to support, facilitate or catalyse capacity development and related change processes. While other definitions exist, the three above capture many of the assumptions listed above and in this document Structure of the note The next chapter outlines the 5Cs framework. The explanation includes information about the preconditions that should be met before the 5Cs framework can be applied. Examples are: (1) an inherent need to have at least some level of capacity within the Southern organisation; and (2) the use of participatory monitoring and evaluation methodologies. Chapter 3 discusses the preconditions in more detail. Chapters 4-6 discuss tools and lessons learned, while chapter 7 focuses on the role of a donor. The bibliography includes all references referred to as well as additional recommended readings that are relevant to the aims of this document. 8

9 2. Introducing the 5Cs framework See capacity as more than a means to an end. Capacity is a legitimate end in itself. This recognition is fundamental to any serious effort to improve the understanding and practice of capacity development Origin and purpose of the 5Cs framework In 2002, Govnet, the Network on Governance and Capacity Development of the OECD, asked the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM) to study how organisations and systems, mainly in developing countries, have succeeded in building their capacity and improving performance. The resulting work focused on endogenous processes of capacity development that is, the process of change from the perspective of those undergoing the change.4 Box 2 gives further information about the study, which provided the basis for the development of the 5Cs framework. Box 2: Background information on the ECDPM study on capacity, change and performance The specific purposes of this study were twofold: To enhance understanding of the interrelationships amongst capacity, change and performance across a wide range of development experiences; and To provide general recommendations and tools to support the effectiveness of external interventions aimed at improving capacity and performance. The five-year research programme on capacity, change and performance included an extensive review of the literature and sixteen case studies. The cases embrace a wide spectrum of capacity situations, covering different sectors, objectives, geographic locations and organisational histories, such as churches in Papua New Guinea, tax office in Rwanda and a nation-wide network in Brazil. The work included seven thematic papers and five workshop reports. The sixteen case studies looked at how organisations and systems have succeeded in building their capacity and improving performance. In this sense, the study adopted an appreciative perspective, focussing on what worked well and why. The final report highlights the many ways that organisations and systems go about developing capacity. It concludes that there are no blueprints for capacity development and that the process tends to be more complex, nuanced and unpredictable than is often assumed. The ECDPM study proposes a complementary lens for exploring organisational or system capacity. It encourages stakeholders to look beyond the formal capacities to deliver development results - such as technical and managerial competencies - and to identify other factors that drive organisational and system behaviour. Exploring capacity through this lens can help stakeholders diagnose capacity strengths and weaknesses, monitor capacity change over time and contribute to organisational learning. It can also be used to gauge the contribution of external support. 4 The results of the study, interim reports and an elaborated methodology can be consulted at or 9

10 Based on the cases examined, the ECDPM study identified generic characteristics of capacity development processes. These findings carry implications for the way external agencies go about supporting capacity development. The results of the study are understood in five core capabilities which enable an organisation or system to perform and survive. All five capabilities are necessary. None is sufficient by itself. A key challenge therefore is for an organisation to be conscious of how it develops itself inside out - in relation to these five core capabilities. Section 2.3 further describes and discusses the five capabilities as elements in a system, which needs to be explained Systems perspective and multi-stakeholder approach Before the 5Cs framework can be put to use, stakeholders would need to agree on an essential concept of capacity as an outcome of an open system made up of resources, relationship, purposes and yardsticks for performance. An organisation can be seen as a system interacting with wider society. In other words, it is part of a bigger system. The most critical practical issue is, from the start of PM&E, to get relevant stakeholders on the same wavelength in terms this way of thinking about capacity and what they see as being its core constituents or capabilities. There are two principal conceptual foundations behind the 5Cs framework, namely: A systems perspective on capacity, and A multi-stakeholder approach. Some conceptual background on the two foundational elements is summarised in box 3. Box 3: Understanding capacity: the need for a systems perspective and multistakeholder approach The 5Cs framework starts from a systems perspective. This means organisations and collaborative associations, i.e. when several parties work together to achieve common goals are seen as social systems in their own right (see 3.5). This perspective opens the way for a comprehensive understanding of the true nature of and the 'boundaries' to development problems. Importantly, it gives a view of the inter-connectedness of units, such as departments, and their functioning within organisational systems. Organisations are social entities, not machines. They are part of other systems. To stay fit they must adapt themselves to complex situations and ever-changing circumstances (IOB 2011: 121). The influence of history, culture, foreign relations and politics of a country often makes the development of organisations very unpredictable.5 System thinking means capacity development is understood as an endogenous, nonlinear process that is strongly influenced by a range of internal and external factors. Donor support is only one consideration (NIMD 2010: 23; PSO 2010: 29). Decisive for a Southern organisation s 5 The IOB evaluation (IOB 2011) applied a variation of systems thinking that is called the complex adaptive systems (CAS) approach. Its particular features are that it focuses on processes more than on structures or outcomes as a way of managing; systems are seen as functioning on the basis of interrelationships between people, groups, structures and ideas; and emergence is a key concept in terms of the way human systems change. According to the CAS approach, systems evolve on the basis of countless interactions between huge numbers of elements. Human systems indeed, all complex systems have an in-built tendency towards self-organisation. It is this process that drives the emergence of order, direction and capacity from within a system itself. The CAS approach thus challenges traditional log frame (logical framework) thinking that is based on predictability and on assumptions that results arise from one cause only. 10

11 capacity is the context in which it operates. This means that understanding country conditions is crucial. By its very natures, capacity development is a challenging process. The use of the 5Cs framework requires a multi-stakeholder approach because shared values and result orientation are important to facilitate the capacity development process. A developing system includes different stakeholders. Each one has its own constantly evolving interpretation of the system s plans for the future, as well as corresponding ideas about other stakeholders who could help achieve these. The 5Cs framework therefore needs to accommodate the different visions of stakeholders and conceive different strategies for raising capacity and improving performance in a given situation (Engel et al. 2007). This makes the approach rigorous and valid. Stakeholders need to have a collective interest in applying the framework, with regular consultation to compare results over time. This investment improves the monitoring of the development process and the long-term capacities. This multi-stakeholder process can also help to strengthen the five capabilities. The application of the principles of systems thinking and multi-stakeholder approaches to PM&E means acknowledging the difficulty to attribute impact to discrete interventions. It also places emphasis on learning from practical experience. This can be done by both measuring progress in achieving predetermined objectives and by paying attention to vital, though unanticipated features, insights or variables. Doing so can empower stakeholders involved in implementation. This way of working can help overcome the discrepancy between the context and complexity in which the Southern organisation operates every day, but which is often not well articulated/communicated towards its donors (IOB 2011: 131). Small organisations to (inter)national arrangements, such as social networks, can be defined as systems generating particular outcomes. The 5Cs frame can cope with location in the North or South and scale from single entity to multi-level value chains. In fact, all kinds of purposeful social arrangements can use the 5Cs framework. Drawing a system s boundaries determines what is considered relevant or irrelevant, who is in or out and, thus who benefits and who is at a disadvantage. Key elements that need to be looked at when examining systems are shown in box 4. Box 4: Key elements to take into account when interpreting system content and relationships Preconditions for successfully using systems thinking and multi-stakeholder approaches: The overall goals of the organisation, and its values to achieve them need to be identified and recognised throughout the organisation. Leadership in the organisation encourages experimentation, which enhances the motivation and capacity to learn from experience. An organisation has regular opportunities for learning from experience, self-assessment such as the identification of 'stories' involving positive examples or experiences, significant changes or errors. An organisation needs flexibility in structures, team formation, partnerships and approach in the light of new needs or past experience. 11

12 Leadership should encourage the development of individual and group skills in response to identified demands or new priorities; which can be developed on-the-job, through participatory face-to-face practical, 'hands-on' approaches. The organisation needs M&E systems that are responsive and relevant to the requirements of members or clients. Understanding capacity from a system-perspective: Put emphasis on understanding country context and conditions, location-specific circumstances and internal and external factors. Analyse the impact of these on the organisation. Consider the wider system in which an organisation is operating. Identify appropriate partners and build relationships and complementarity with other actors in the system. Ensuring a multi-stakeholder approach: Requires an investment in terms of time and resources. Requires open communication, i.e. good relations between the key stakeholders to ensure stakeholders have a collective interest in applying the framework. Is facilitated by setting criteria for identifying stakeholders. Is facilitated by planning how and at which steps stakeholders participate in the capacity development process, in planning, monitoring and evaluation. How to set adequate system boundaries? Start by clearly defining the outcome, or value, that the organisation should generate for society. Treat southern organisations as open systems operating in complex situations. This means identifying the contextual factors at the international, national and local levels that influence the desired outcome. Where the system boundaries are set depends on pragmatic reasons such as the resources available to include the main actors. Ask: what can the organisation control, what can it influence and what can it only appreciate but do nothing about? These principles appear rather abstract but become more concrete when applied to reallife situations, such as described in box 5 for evaluating the capacity of environmental assessment systems. Box 5: Example identifying the unit of analysis in the case of environmental assessments A full chain of environmental assessments involves a large number of stakeholders. Consequently, the Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) evaluation (2011) faced a complex system for which boundaries must be set. Determining the best unit of analysis for the system was a main limitation. There is always the risk that the scope becomes too wide. The alternative restricting the focus to the relevant environment ministry alone would be too limiting. This choice would not reflect NCEA s comprehensive approach to capacity development for environmental management. The open boundary approach made it possible to deal with the issue of analysing the Environmental Assessment (EA) system. The evaluation chose to make the national environmental assessment system the unit of analysis (see figure below). 12

13 This choice included all institutions directly involved but also the regulatory framework that links them together. As a hypothesis, the evaluators considered a number of organisations collaborating with clear but distinct tasks and obligations in the EA system to be a collaborative association (see also section 6.4). The collaboration can be characterised as not permanent, nor linear (following procedural guidelines). Instead, the arrangement was designed to be complementary, correcting and strengthening on the basis of the competencies and skills of each of the contributing party. The association involves diverse stakeholders from government, civil society and private business. But, since there is little integration of activities, programmes and planning, it is clear that one cannot speak of collaborating partners. For each country involved, the object of study was delineated more precisely according to the specific role played by each stakeholder in the national EA system. The categories of stakeholders involved in an assessment may appear to be similar. An association of mining companies may be registered as an NGO. But its interests may not be the same as environmental activists also registered as an NGO. The environmental issue, i.e., the outcome of concern issuing mining permits, preventing air or river pollution, dumping of waste, protection of endangered species determines the specific combination of interested parties that make up the system that has to be taken into account Capacity and the five core capabilities The 5Cs framework distinguishes capacity defined as a producing social value and five core capabilities which, by themselves, do not necessarily contribute to social change. In the framework, Capacity is referred to as the overall ability of an organisation or system to create value for others. Capabilities are the collective ability of a group or a system to do something either inside or outside the system. The collective skills involved may be technical, logistical, managerial or generative (i.e. the ability to earn legitimacy, to adapt, to create meaning, etc). 13

14 Competencies are the energies, skills and abilities of individuals. Fundamental to all are inputs, like human, material and financial resources, technology, information and so on. To the degree that they are developed and successfully integrated, capabilities contribute to the overall capacity or ability of an organisation or system (see section 2.2) to create value for others. A single capability is not sufficient to create capacity. All are needed and are strongly interrelated. Thus, to achieve its development goals, the 5Cs capacity framework says that every organisation/system must have five basic capabilities. These are: The capability to act and commit The capability to deliver on development objectives The capability to adapt and self-renew The capability to relate to external stakeholders The capability to achieve coherence Figure 1 is a visual representation of the 5Cs framework; which can be used for strategic planning, tracking and discussing changes in capacity and as a framework for evaluations. In this figure, the Southern organisation has the central position, to take an endogenous view of capacity. The figure shows the five core capabilities are closely related and overlie each other. Together, they contribute to an organisation s capacity to achieve its objectives in bringing about social change. 6 In the diagram, the arrow from Output pointing back to the organisation stops at the system boundary. In other words, this feedback is not directly connected to the core capability to deliver on development objectives. The outputs are the Southern organisation s outputs. Outcomes, change in the Southern society, are also the result of the outputs of others. This situation makes attribution difficult but not impossible. The five capabilities need to be contextualised, and related to the perspectives of the Southern partners with regard to capacity development. 7 Once this is done, key pointers 8 or indicators can be developed which allow people to plan, monitor and evaluate changes in relation to the different capabilities. This process is discussed in detail in section At a more theoretical level, different people who have been involved in the IOB evaluation (IOB 2011) have questioned the figure s central positioning of the capability to deliver on development objectives, instead preferring the capability to achieve coherence in that position. In view of the interrelated nature of the Capabilities and each capability s necessity for capacity, this discussion would not have major theoretical implications and would instead be about visual preference or a need to particularly prioritise one of them (which is a priori not advisable given that each situation is different). 7 The annex presents a summary of key components from the 5Cs, as published in the IOB synthesis report. 8 The term pointers was suggested by Engel et al. (2007) who described it as follows: lenses that can help capture relevant information describing the development of certain processes. Pointers are qualitative and are used in the context of a process that is generally open-ended rather than linear. They are not the same as indicators, which tend to be less dynamic and are used mainly for quantitative measurements. The term pointer is also used to underline the complementary nature of this model compared with other, more quantitatively-oriented approaches. 14

15 Figure 1: Analytical framework for capacity development Adapted from: De Lange The 5Cs framework adds to a rich family of approaches presented to monitoring and evaluating organisational and/or societal changes.9 Before describing the different capabilities in more detail, the following box 6 gives a short description of what some users consider as the main differences and advantages of the 5Cs framework compared to existing tools. Box 6: Added value of the 5Cs framework compared to existing approaches? Evaluating capacity is often been done through applying organisational capacity assessment (OCA) tools, based on a predefined set of indicators (usually formulated by donors). The 5Cs framework has some advantages compared to existing OCA tools as confirmed by several organisations that applied both instruments: The 5Cs framework enables a broader look at capacity development in an organisation. The 5Cs framework enables an in-depth discussion on identified pointers. Most OCA tools focus mainly on the harder dimensions of capacity, such as infrastructure, staffing, organisational procedures, accounting and project management skills and not that 9 For example, see: UNDP, 2010, A Guide to Civil Society Assessments, Oslo Governance Centre, Oslo. 15

16 much on the softer dimensions such as legitimacy, resilience, trust, learning culture, etc. The 5Cs framework offers the opportunity to focus on what is going well and what can be enhanced rather than focussing on identifying gaps. Instrumental use of OCA tools often leading to imposed and superficial processes of organisational change, unrealistic timeframes. OCA tools are often driven by accountability concerns of aid agencies rather than being supportive for learning processes. Capability to act and commit This capacity is about the ability to work properly: to plan, take decisions and act on these decisions collectively. For this, an organisation needs for example: Structures that can function efficiently with available resources; Ability to properly mobilise financial, institutional and human resources; Committed and stable, inspiring and action oriented leadership and the acceptance of leadership s integrity by staff; Executive structures with a legal basis to make binding commitments; Effective monitoring of the work plan. Box 7: The Capability to Commit and Act, some examples The environmental impact assessment (EIA) system in Georgia suffered greatly from the deterioration in institutional and legal frameworks as a result of the Rose Revolution in This made the EIA system less able to act and commit according to its mandate (NCEA 2011). This ability is clearly weakened if Southern organisations have to cope with acute leadership problems. For example, in the case of the rural membership organisation MVIWATA in Tanzania (IOB 2011: 149) leadership remained concentrated on one person, while the organisation s outreach expanded. The staff developed itself, but is at risk of becoming overstretched. A centralised leadership style also influences other capabilities, such as that to adapt. Capability to deliver on development objectives This core capability concerns the organisations skill to ensure that it is producing what it is established to do. To deliver on development objectives it is important, among others, to have access to: Current and future financial resource base and the ability to generate own financial resources (members, services/ products, or subsidies); (External) knowledge and information sources; Human resources; Adequate facilities, equipment and premises; Agreed standards and performance measures = results. The availability of sustained external funding (and thus the ability to attract funds), both depend on and influence the core capability to deliver on development objectives. Simply 16

17 put, performance impacts on attractiveness for funders. This capability is often weak, since it often depends on adapting to changes in donor priorities. Many Southern organisations rely heavily on external funding, and are vulnerable to lack of continuity and the risks of withdrawal. Box 8: The Capability to Deliver on Development Objectives, some examples In three studies carried out on districts in Ghana s health sector, funding constraints were considered to be a major factor inhibiting the achievement of development objectives. It was shown that strong and motivating leadership that worked closely with communities and networked at national level reduced this inhibiting factor. For many organisations it is hard, or not even an option, to generate own financial resources through membership contributions or payments for services or products (Ghana 2010). In other cases, funding depends on political decisions and on governmental budgets, for instance in the case of the environment ministries (see NCEA 2011). Capability to adapt and self-renew The ability of an organisation to learn internally and to adjust to shifting contexts and relevant trends is mostly influenced by the following factors: Internal openness to learning (including acknowledgment of mistakes); Active pursuit of internal (organisational) learning on performance and strategy; Confidence to change: leaving room for diversity, flexibility and creativity; Ability to analyse current political trends, awareness of external market development, and understand the consequences for the organisation; Use of opportunities and incentives. Box 9: The Capability to Adapt and Self-Renew, some examples In the cases where positive changes were detected, leadership can put clear emphasis on internal learning and awareness of external market developments. In the case of the Kwahu South District Health Management Team (DHMT) in Ghana (IOB 2011: 162), a culture of reflection and of addressing mistakes exists within the District Health System. The DHMT initiated changes by engaging communities in churches and by creative use of funding for vertical programmes for integrated health training. Capability to relate to external stakeholders This capability is about building and maintaining networks with external actors. These actors include governmental structures, private sector parties, civil society organisations (CSOs) and in the end their constituencies. Depending on the kind of organisation placed at the centre of a system - private sector, government institution, civil society - a focus on 17

18 service delivery makes different kinds of local actors more or less relevant. However, relationships with international organisations are almost always considered important, especially with regard to the acquisition of funding. Relevant factors in this capability concern for instance: Relational competencies to build and maintain networks with domestic actors relevant to realization of societal outcomes; The ability to build and maintain relationships within its own setup/ structures, where communication plays a key role; The ability to build and maintain relationships with international organisations for the acquisition of funding; Political legitimacy, social credibility and reputation; Integer leadership and staff; Operational credibility /reliability; Participation in coalitions; Adequate alliances with external stakeholders. Box 10: The Capability to Relate to External Stakeholders, some examples The rural membership organisation FEKRITAMA in Madagascar interacts with a large range of different actors/networks (NGOs, private/ governmental sectors and international organisations). FEKRITAMA has an extensive membership base (about 46,000 persons in 2009 and 2,015 associations); it is a trusted partner for its members and donors (IOB 2011: 148). On the other hand, the NIMD Guatemala office (IOB 2011: 163) is not strong on this capability. The principal socio-economic groups and parties do not trust each other, nor are they in touch. Politicians have poor professional ethics and no shared vision on national problems. The Permanent Forum of Political Parties (FPPP for the Spanish acronym) working groups take the initiative to train party officers, youngsters and female party militants; FPPP is also involved in preparing laws, sometimes in cooperation with parliamentarians and civil society. Capability to achieve coherence A main factor here is the strength of an organisations identity, self-awareness and discipline which includes: Clear and coherent mandate, vision and strategy, which is known by staff and used by its management to guide its decision-making process; Well-defined internal organisational principles on mandates, operations and human resources management; A PM&E system geared to monitoring fulfilment of the operational principles; A leadership committed to achieving coherence between values, principles and operations; An ability to balance stability and change; A consistent quality, style and reliability of management. 18

19 Box 11: The Capability to Achieve Coherence, some examples For example, in the case of the Sustainable Community Outreach Programmes for Empowerment in Sudan (IOB 2011: 168), the programme balanced interventions linked to emergency and development well and developed skills for a consistent community approach, but its smallenterprise strategy was not appropriate. Leadership was not strong enough to maintain coherence. See for other examples the cases of St Martin, Kenya, the three rural membership organisations, and the three health districts in Ghana Capacity as generating social value The purpose of this publication does not allow for a detailed discussion on elements highlighted in 2.3. Nevertheless, it is important to emphasise that the conceptual basis of the 5Cs is that an organisation s capacity is not an end in itself; it is also a means to bring about social change. The issue then is: capacity for what? The answer to this question is embedded in the organisation s objectives and the way these are specified in its outcome statements and corresponding outcome indicators (IOB 2011). This factor is so important that it is revisited in chapter 4. As shown in figure 2, the analytical framework draws a distinction between capacity defined as a social value and the core capabilities which, by themselves, do not necessarily contribute to social change. Given that each system will have a particular core business in mind (for example poverty reduction, disaster control or financial profits ), the theoretical conclusion that capacity is both a means and an end to development does not mean that the two are of equal standing. Although core businesses may evolve over time, it is ultimately the social value created that legitimises the organisation, and not the other way around. Figure 2 gives a visual representation of how the 5Cs may be situated in relation to available fundamentals and resources of an organisation, and how the 5Cs in turn contribute to an organisation s capacity and social value. But bear in mind, that for the sake of clarity the figure is a bit misleading. There is no clear ladder to capacity. Each level feeds back, making the system dynamic and constantly changing. Which is why monitoring and learning should be in real time. 19

20 Figure 2: The 5Cs in an organisation, contributing to capacity and social value 20

21 3. How to use the 5Cs framework: preconditions The 5Cs framework can provide an important and complementary multi-actor view on capacity change across very diverse conditions. The methods applied appear to be the most important factors in determining the extent to which the production of meaningful information is possible The central role of the Southern organisation Ownership is key to building and sustaining capacity. This requires that, as capacities are developed, ownership resides with the Southern organisation. Capacity Development comes from within; no one capacitates another without their permission, willingness or corporation. Ownership means the subject of development should in principle take the initiative. The stakeholders of the organisation need to analyse their capacity problem as [c]apacity development can be self-sustained only if it is anchored in endogenous processes (IOB 2011: 129). This type of endogenously-led participatory process requires an investment in terms of resources like time and money. It takes time to listen, negotiate, and take action when different parties are involved. Yet, it is the only way to ensure the crucial element: ownership among stakeholders of the their capacity development process. Stakeholders within an organisation will be open to capacity development only if they have experienced and/or are convinced that certain capacities need to be built in order to achieve results or bring about social change. The required participatory process facilitates an accurate analysis of the capacity problem and creates the collective energy, motivation and commitment of stakeholders to engage in a process of change. The right quality of participatory approach has thus important gains: it increases benefits and effectiveness of interventions. This means that at the core of effective capacity development is endogenous energy, motivation, commitment and persistence. It concerns the willingness and ability of stakeholders to engage in and lead change. This requires a process of encouraging and stimulating individuals to act. Voluntary collective action - thus ownerships of the capacity development process - arises from leadership as well as the ability of groups to be motivated and driven by leaders. The type of leadership applied influences the collective action. Ownership can be elusive, and can change over time, or not be shared in different levels of an organisation. Moreover, the interests of (some) stakeholders can change and initial supporters may lose interest. 21

22 Box 12: Key organisational ingredients for addressing capacity issues Be aware of and prepared for the fact that capacity development can create anxiety as well as enthusiasm. Aid relationships involve differences in power. External encouragement of change can be perceived as a requirement for support that can undermine ownership and trust. Honest discussion about power can promote relational mutuality. Addressing capacity development requires increased investments. It will need to be seen as a speciality requiring dedicated resources. Time must be invested to explain and explore the 5Cs framework with stakeholders and to make it context-specific. Building and sustaining good relations among stakeholders is a prerequisite to apply the 5Cs framework. Capacity development requires incremental planning processes. It requires organisational incentives to encourage staff to take part in the process, including encouraging, effective leadership to help groups to work together Engaging stakeholders in building the common plan, defining their positions, in dialogues with other parties to ultimately develop a shared analysis and shared action. Be aware of the formal and informal processes that can shape and modify patterns of ownership over time. This implies having a good understanding of the context and of stakeholder interests and influence, and staying engaged Key challenges, or how not to use the 5Cs framework Partly based on the authors own considerations as well as the recent experiences in the IOB evaluation, a couple of key challenges have to be faced if one is to successfully use the 5Cs framework (Engel et al. 2007): The approach requires good links and relations between key stakeholders. As a participatory approach based on open communication, it is less useful in situations in which relations among stakeholders have broken down. However, the ability of an organisation or organisations to successfully identify and involve all key stakeholders in a developing system is an important indication of their capabilities. Given this minimum relational requirement, would not be wise for donors to enforce the use of the framework by its partners. Actors need basic process understanding and commitment. There is an inherent danger that the 5Cs framework could become just another OCA tool, with no proper introduction or thorough understanding. 10 The perceived cost may be too high. Although we believe that evidence based on the views of many stakeholders is more rigorous and valid than the judgement of one or two third parties (e.g. a report prepared by an external consultant), the former process is considerably more resource- and time-consuming than the latter. 10 Evidence of this has already been seen during the IOB evaluation (for example IOB 2011 in the MKC-RDA case). In the case of the CADEP programme, it was integrated into the programme proposal as a monitoring tool, but was never actually used as such by the successive programme advisors (PSO 2010: 177). 22

REPORT Complexity-oriented oriented Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (PME) From alternative to mainstream? Public seminar, 10 November 2010, 1.30-5.00 p.m. Concordia Theatre, The Hague 1. What was the

Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan Cap-Net International Network for Capacity Building in Sustainable Water Management November 2009 The purpose of this document is to improve learning from the Cap-Net

Monitoring and Evaluation of Sports in Development (SiD) Interventions presented by: Pamela K. Mbabazi, Ph.D. Faculty of Development Studies, Department of Development Studies Mbarara University of Science

Organizational development of trade unions An instrument for self diagnosis Elaborated on the basis of an experience in Latin America FNV Mondiaal 2007 INDICE INTRODUCTION I. Concepts 1. What is organizational

UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT Chairman s draft recommendations on the basis of the consolidated version of the rolling document A. Shaping the outcomes of IGF meetings

Policy Paper on Non-Formal Education: A framework for indicating and assuring quality Adopted by the Council of Members/ Extraordinary General Assembly 2-3 May 2008 (Castelldefels, Catalonia - Spain) 0.

GLOBAL ALLIANCE FOR CLIMATE-SMART AGRICULTURE (GACSA) FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT Version 01 :: 1 September 2014 I Vision 1. In today s world there is enough food produced for all to be well-fed, but one person

Country Ownership of Policy Reforms and Aid Effectiveness: The Challenge of Enhancing the Policy Space for Developing Countries in Aid Relationships Statement by Louis Kasekende, Chief Economist, African

Guidelines on Partnerships with Southern CSOs 1 Guidelines on Partnerships with Southern CSOs April 2013 2 Guidelines on Partnerships with Southern CSOs Guidelines developed by Mike Williams, Consultant,

An Exploration of Best Practices in Health Promotion: a short history of the Best Practices Work Group, Centre for Health Promotion, University of Toronto by Barbara Kahan and Michael Goodstadt May 14,

briefing note Building Disaster Risk Management capacity: key principles How can programmes aiming to build disaster risk management (DRM) capacity improve their effectiveness? What works and why? What

Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG) Approved by the Ministerial Conference in May 2015 by European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education

ETI PERSPECTIVE 2020: A FIVE YEAR STRATEGY Introduction This document is the final and Board approved version of ETI s strategic directions based on the ETI Board meeting discussion of 12 th March 2015.

How to Measure and Report Social Impact A Guide for investees The Social Investment Business Group January 2014 Table of contents Introduction: The Development, Uses and Principles of Social Impact Measurement

A FRAMEWORK FOR NATIONAL HEALTH POLICIES, STRATEGIES AND PLANS June 2010 A FRAMEWORK FOR NATIONAL HEALTH POLICIES, STRATEGIES AND PLANS June 2010 This paper reviews current practice in and the potential

Hanover Declaration Local Action Driving Transformation 1 National Governments: Build upon local authority climate leadership! The International Conference on Climate Action 2015 (ICCA2015) showed that

Governance as Stewardship: Decentralization and Sustainable Human Development by Jerry VanSant Research Triangle Institute USA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

Evaluation of Dutch support to capacity development The case of the Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) The case of the Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment (NCEA)

Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG) Endorsed by the Bologna Follow-Up Group in September 2014 Subject to approval by the Ministerial Conference in

QUÉBEC DECLARATION ON ECOTOURISM In the framework of the UN International Year of Ecotourism, 2002, under the aegis of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Tourism Organization

Revised Policy Paper on Non-Formal Education: A Framework for indicating and assuring quality ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF MEMBERS ANTWERP, BELGIUM, 6-7 MAY 2011 1 COMEM -FINAL Executive summary Non-Formal

Equal Rights and Treatment for Roma in Moldova and Ukraine Project Management Methodology Manual WELCOME TO THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE PROJECT MANAGEMENT METHODOLOGY In July 2001, the Council of Europe launched

PRINCIPLES FOR EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE PARIS, 1991 DAC Principles for Evaluation of Development Assistance Development Assistance Committee Abstract: The following

pm4dev, 2007 management for development series Introduction to Project Management PROJECT MANAGEMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS PROJECT MANAGEMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS A methodology to manage

Process Mapping Tool for Evaluation SW UK Partnership There are three areas of Recommendation developed by the work of the SW UK partnership. These are set out in the SW UK published Policy Analysis. They

A guide to evaluating Council Services using quality indicators Securing the future... l Improving services l Enhancing quality of life l Making the best use of public resources Foreword Perth & Kinross

GUIDELINES FOR ENGAGING FAITH BASED ORGANISATIONS (FBOS) AS AGENTS OF CHANGE These Guidelines provide a critical framework for engagement with faith based organisations (FBOs). They are not a blue print.

Training Professionals in Trade Policy Development Advocacy and Negotiation - The Training Challenge in Commercial Diplomacy Geza Feketekuty The expansion of trade brought about by the reduction of trade

Overview This standard identifies the requirements associated with leading and managing change within care services. It includes the implementation of a shared vision for the service provision and using

PARIS AGENDA OR 12 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MEDIA EDUCATION 25 years after the adoption of the Grünwald Declaration that paved the way for media education at the international level, experts, education policy-makers,

Article by Peter Mihailidis, Rad Miletich and Adel Khreich: Peter Mihailidis is an Associate Director with bluevisions, a project and program management consultancy based in Milsons Point in Sydney. Peter

Introduction to Monitoring and Evaluation Using the Logical Framework Approach Developed and Presented by: Umhlaba Development Services Umhlaba Development Services Noswal Hall, Braamfontein, Johannesburg,

PARTNERS FOR CHANGE GOVERNANCE AND CIVIL SOCIETY SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA PARTNERS FOR CHANGE GOVERNANCE AND CIVIL SOCIETY PARTNERS FOR CHANGE The British Council is committed to building engagement and trust

The future agenda for development cooperation: voices of Dutch society Contribution prepared for the High Level Panel on the Post 2015 development agenda - March 2013 Prepared by NCDO, in cooperation with

OPINION ON GENDER DIMENSION IN THE NEXT PROGRAMMING PERIOD OF THE STRUCTURAL FUNDS 2007-2013 Advisory Committee on Equal Opportunities Between Women and Men July 2006 1 Opinion 1 on GENDER DIMENSION IN

EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EDUCATION AND CULTURE Education and vocational training, Coordination of Erasmus+ School education; Erasmus + ET2020 WORKING GROUP ON SCHOOLS POLICY WORK PROGRAMME

Part 1. Concepts, Tools and Principles 3 Overview Part 1. MfDR Concepts, Tools and Principles M anaging for Development Results (MfDR) is multidimensional, relating back to concepts about how to make international

Building Equality, Diversity and Inclusion into the NHS Board Selection Process for Non Executives and Independent Directors March 2012 Edition The NHS Leadership Academy s purpose is to develop outstanding

Fundamental rights & anti-discrimination THE COSTS AND BENEFITS OF DIVERSITY European Commission Emplo 2 THE COSTS AND BENEFITS OF DIVERSITY A Study on Methods and Indicators to Measure the Cost-Effectiveness

Monitoring and measuring change in market systems -rethinking the current paradigm- (Discussion paper 1, version 3 Oct 2012) 1. Introduction As is widely experienced, markets are not static, but in constant

MAKING YOUR ORGANISATION S INFORMATION ACCESSIBLE FOR ALL IMPLEMENTING THE GUIDELINES FOR ACCESSIBLE INFORMATION project has been funded with support from the European Union. publication reflects the views

MODULE 10 CHANGE MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATION PART OF A MODULAR TRAINING RESOURCE Commonwealth of Australia 2015. With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms and where otherwise noted all material

Meta-analysis of Reviews and Evaluation of Ecoregional Programs Julio A. Berdegué and Germán Escobar 1. Aim, method and organization of the analysis The aim of this report is to summarize the main lessons

Translation of the Partos Code of Conduct, Oct 2012 Introduction Partos members are professional organisations that work in the field of International Collaboration. Their activities take place both here

KM Tools Introduction The purpose of this note is to provide an overview of various tools that can be used for improving the sharing of knowledge and lessons. There are several inter-related tools, each

All available Global Online MBA routes have a set of core modules required to be completed in order to achieve an MBA. Those modules are: Building High Performance Organisations Management and Organisational

NGO Major Group Priorities and Actions for sustainable development in SIDS This statement is made by civil society organisations participating in the SIDS Inter-regional Preparatory Meeting held in Barbados

INTRODUCTION This Declaration, prepared within the framework of the Belgian Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, is addressed to the Member States of the Council of Europe,

1.6 The LO/FTF Council Sustainability Assessment Tools Assessment of project strategies in relation to an organizational development cycle With the time horizon of the LO/FTF Council s project cooperation

AusAID NGO Cooperation Program Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Framework May 2012 Disclaimer: This document outlines a proposed new monitoring, evaluation and learning framework (MELF) for the AusAID

Core Competencies for Strategic Leaders In the BC Public Service Brought to you by the BC Public Service Agency 1 Contents Core Competencies for All Strategic Leaders... 2 Core Competency Definitions...

PROPOSED MANDATE FOR THE GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FOR EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION This document sets out the proposed mandate of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation. It was discussed

Volunteer Managers National Occupational Standards Contents 00 Forward 00 Section 1 Introduction 00 Who are these standards for? 00 Why should you use them? 00 How can you use them? 00 What s in a Standard?

School of Business, Management and Economics Department of Business and Management MSc Financial Risk and Investment Analysis Course Handbook 2013/14 2013 Entry Table of Contents School of Business, Management

Appendix 10 Blaby District Council Housing Stock Transfer CHANGE MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 Change Management Plan Introduction As part of the decision making process to pursue transfer, the Blaby District Council

NGO Policy Briefing Paper No.4, April 2001 For the NGO Sector Analysis Programme NGOS AND PARTNERSHIP This Policy Briefing Paper presents the findings from the first phase of INTRAC s research Promoting